1) Why didn't we see tea party rallies when President George Herbert Walker Bush passed the unfunded Prescriptrion Drug Benefit to Medi-Care. This article says that alone will dwarf Social Security unfunded liabilities.

http://www.parapundit.com/archives/002013.html


2) I would like to know how you sleep at night being so hypocritical. It's ok when a Republican House, Senate, and President passes an unfunded liability on future generations, but when the CBO estimates "Obamacare" to be deficit neutral some of you march on Washington dressed up in Patriot costumes. Do you see the hypocrisy????? Just wondering?

Why do you ask the same questions repeatedly? The answers remain the same.

Show the link where people answered this question Paul. Why didn't you march on Washington in 2003?

(02-22-2010 10:52 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Show the link where people answered this question Paul. Why didn't you march on Washington in 2003?

because nobody stepped up to organize. I knew plenty of conservatives who were against that bill. they just weren't organized. We criticized Bush when he put tariffs on steel and criticized Obama when he put tariffs on tires.

(02-22-2010 10:38 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Why didn't we see tea party rallies when President George Herbert Walker Bush passed the unfunded Prescriptrion Drug Benefit to Medi-Care. This article says that alone will dwarf Social Security unfunded liabilities.

Well, I can't speak for anyone else, but the reason I didn't go to TEA Party rallies when that happened is that George Herbert Walker Bush is not the president who did that.

I should of just called him Shrub it would of been easier.

I thought maybe it was one of those questions like, "How many animals did Moses put in the ark?" 

I think the difference for many is that it was kind of the first nail in the coffin, and now there are a whole lot more. I have a little different perspective. I'm still waiting on someone to address the problems Ross Perot was talking about back in 1992. I thought the republicans would after they took over congress in 1994. Then I thought Shrub would, but he turned out to be anything but. I don't think Obama has any inclination to do the things that need to be done, but I don't see anyone on the republican side who has a clue either.

I really don't see how the US is going to survive as a livable country. I really don't. And I'm incredibly frustrated because I don't know what I can do about it. Worse, I don't think the vast majority of people are going to realize how bad things are until it's too late. The warning signs will be the collapse.

I have read enough of Obama's writings and heard enough of his speeches to feel that I have a pretty good idea of where he wants to take the country, and his vision of America is a place that I want nothing to do with.

And I see nothing from the republican leadership to suggest that they have a better idea.

And it's supposed to be republicans that don't have an understanding of nuance?

(02-22-2010 10:38 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  1) Why didn't we see tea party rallies when President George Herbert Walker Bush passed the unfunded Prescriptrion Drug Benefit to Medi-Care.

Many on the right were upset about that. I voiced my displeasure on here numberous times. However, and you'd do well to learn this at some point, reactions are shaped by numerous variables, not just one event.

When the drug benefit was passed it wasn't by a president who said he'd never sign a bill like it. Obama signed a pork laden "stimulus" bill that 1) had no real stimulus in it 2) was entirely deficit spending and 3) filled with pork when he said he wouldn't sign pork laden bills.

The drug benefit wasn't a massive government powergrab of 1/6th of the US economy. Obamacare is. The majority of the country wasn't against the drug benefit, the majority are against Obamacare. If they weren't, it would have passed long ago.

When the drug benefit was passed 10% of the country wasn't unemployed, unlike now.

You are like clockwork in comparing apples to tow trucks and trying to make some case against others based on it. You need to learn how to have a well reasoned and logical thought before you try again.

Quote:but when the CBO estimates "Obamacare" to be deficit neutral some of you march on Washington dressed up in Patriot costumes.

This shows your ignorance on several levels.

1) the tea party movement isn't only people on the right. They come from all across the political spectrum. The media and their willing sheep, like you, love to pretend that isn't the case, but it is a lie. You're either a liar or the useful idiot that doesn't know better. Either way, you're wrong.

2) Second, the CBO scores what's in the bill. The bill makes estimates on things like new taxes, mandates, how many people will use Obamacare etc. As has been pointed out ad naseum by many here, there will be after effects of this legislation that will make the estimated costs pie in the sky. Employers will drop their coverage and push their employees to it because it's cheaper to pay the payroll tax than pay for their care. That will swell the roles over what the CBO estimates include because it's not reflected in the bill. The cost will go up because the payroll tax isn't enough to cover those added to the roles. That is but one example of many.

The fact of the matter is these bills are not black and white. There are thousands of cause and effect relationships that must be considered that you and those like you choose to ignore. Either because you lack the mental capacity to consider them or you're too lazy to care. It's why a truly educated discussion is so difficult with you and impossible with Robert.

So to answer you question, I sleep fine. Thanks.

You won't listen anyway, so briefly.... The tea party movement is against the "slash and burn" transformation of Obama. Simply, Obama's scorched earth policies. or scorched America.

(02-23-2010 04:17 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Well, I can't speak for anyone else, but the reason I didn't go to TEA Party rallies when that happened is that George Herbert Walker Bush is not the president who did that.

(02-23-2010 07:29 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  I should of just called him Shrub it would of been easier.

And more accurate - it were George W Bush that passed the prescription drug benefits.

Without Democratic pressure on the drug benefits front, there is no way that the Republicans, led by George W Bush, would have done anything like this. You can view it cynically - they passed a crap bill in order to kick the can down the road - or you can view it as a sign of bi-partisanship - George W Bush worked with the minority party to pass a bill that represents a compromise of their agenda, not his. The truth is somewhere in the middle. But, the prevailing view among conservatives is that it was a bad idea, but one that wouldn't do significant damage and would avert a genuinely harmful bill.

But, in my view, Bush was more bi-partisan than Obama has shown to be thus far (another example is the Department of Homeland Security, which was a Democratic idea but GWB acceded anyways). When Obama comes to the table for compromise, it is only when that is a required step in order to pass something on his agenda. That may be a curse of the super-majority, but I think it is also characteristic of Bush's rule as Texas governor. He had the luxury of never having to talk to Democrats in this state, but he reached out anyways. Obama doesn't have anything like that kind of history - his voting record is very one-sided and that's all there really is to go by.

Charles Krauthammer's article on presidential leadership is worth a read...

Krauthammer Wrote:In the latter days of the Carter presidency, it became fashionable to say that the office had become unmanageable and was simply too big for one man. America had become ungovernable.

Then came Ronald Reagan, and all that chatter disappeared.

...

Later, a highly skilled Democratic president, Bill Clinton, successfully tackled another supposedly intractable problem: the culture of intergenerational dependency. He collaborated with another House speaker, Newt Gingrich, to produce the single most successful social reform of our time, the abolition of welfare as an entitlement.

It turned out that the country's problems were not problems of structure but of leadership. Reagan and Clinton had it. Carter didn't.

I think you can guess where this is leading...

Of course, I don't view myself on the right, and haven't really addressed your question except to offer explanations of why people didn't protest.

(02-23-2010 10:18 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  You won't listen anyway, so briefly.... The tea party movement is against the "slash and burn" transformation of Obama. Simply, Obama's scorched earth policies. or scorched America.

??? Where's that "Not sure if serious" pic?

Why do you think Republicans lost control of Congress? Independents were hopping mad at the deficits.

(02-22-2010 10:38 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  1) Why didn't we see tea party rallies when President George Herbert Walker Bush passed the unfunded Prescriptrion Drug Benefit to Medi-Care. This article says that alone will dwarf Social Security unfunded liabilities.

http://www.parapundit.com/archives/002013.html


2) I would like to know how you sleep at night being so hypocritical. It's ok when a Republican House, Senate, and President passes an unfunded liability on future generations, but when the CBO estimates "Obamacare" to be deficit neutral some of you march on Washington dressed up in Patriot costumes. Do you see the hypocrisy????? Just wondering?

There is only one real reason. At that time we still had jobs and our businesses were doing moderately well.

(02-22-2010 11:23 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  

(02-22-2010 10:52 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Show the link where people answered this question Paul. Why didn't you march on Washington in 2003?

because nobody stepped up to organize. I knew plenty of conservatives who were against that bill. they just weren't organized. We criticized Bush when he put tariffs on steel and criticized Obama when he put tariffs on tires.

I remember distinctly RUSH being upset big time against that bill. If MAC remembers the party of "dissent" complained we didn't spend ENOUGH dollars at the time.

SPEND SPEND SPEND because we will all be wealthier and won't have to work. More money to Harrry and Nancy and let then decide where to invest ...

(02-23-2010 07:33 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I thought maybe it was one of those questions like, "How many animals did Moses put in the ark?" 

I think the difference for many is that it was kind of the first nail in the coffin, and now there are a whole lot more. I have a little different perspective. I'm still waiting on someone to address the problems Ross Perot was talking about back in 1992. I thought the republicans would after they took over congress in 1994. Then I thought Shrub would, but he turned out to be anything but. I don't think Obama has any inclination to do the things that need to be done, but I don't see anyone on the republican side who has a clue either.

I really don't see how the US is going to survive as a livable country. I really don't. And I'm incredibly frustrated because I don't know what I can do about it. Worse, I don't think the vast majority of people are going to realize how bad things are until it's too late. The warning signs will be the collapse.

I have read enough of Obama's writings and heard enough of his speeches to feel that I have a pretty good idea of where he wants to take the country, and his vision of America is a place that I want nothing to do with.

And I see nothing from the republican leadership to suggest that they have a better idea.

This. We have crossed the Rubicon and both gangs are equally at fault.

I only see RADICAL change as a possibility of salvaging this mess. I'd start with ending corporate taxes and almost total deregulation to again make America the destination of worldwide business instead of the place business runs away from...then...cut government spending to bare bones...across the board..including military,social and entitlements.

Only individuals pay taxes since corporate taxes are simply overhead...ending corporate taxation would lead to lowering of prices and put money back into the pockets of those that spend it. Consumer spending is the REAL fuel for an economy...NOT government spending. Ending much of the regulation that muzzles business and industry would again make the USA the destination for commerce. Putting people back to work in "the marketplace" is essential to salvaging this mess.

I have ZERO faith that any of the thugs in power will do anything that will make much impact in turning things around. I don't think there are even a handful in Washington that have a clue as to what to do and or have the WILL to do it. I am preparing for the worst. It is inevitable.

(02-23-2010 03:34 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(02-23-2010 07:33 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I thought maybe it was one of those questions like, "How many animals did Moses put in the ark?" 

I think the difference for many is that it was kind of the first nail in the coffin, and now there are a whole lot more. I have a little different perspective. I'm still waiting on someone to address the problems Ross Perot was talking about back in 1992. I thought the republicans would after they took over congress in 1994. Then I thought Shrub would, but he turned out to be anything but. I don't think Obama has any inclination to do the things that need to be done, but I don't see anyone on the republican side who has a clue either.

I really don't see how the US is going to survive as a livable country. I really don't. And I'm incredibly frustrated because I don't know what I can do about it. Worse, I don't think the vast majority of people are going to realize how bad things are until it's too late. The warning signs will be the collapse.

I have read enough of Obama's writings and heard enough of his speeches to feel that I have a pretty good idea of where he wants to take the country, and his vision of America is a place that I want nothing to do with.

And I see nothing from the republican leadership to suggest that they have a better idea.

This. We have crossed the Rubicon and both gangs are equally at fault.

I only see RADICAL change as a possibility of salvaging this mess. I'd start with ending corporate taxes and almost total deregulation to again make America the destination of worldwide business instead of the place business runs away from...then...cut government spending to bare bones...across the board..including military,social and entitlements.

Only individuals pay taxes since corporate taxes are simply overhead...ending corporate taxation would lead to lowering of prices and put money back into the pockets of those that spend it. Consumer spending is the REAL fuel for an economy...NOT government spending. Ending much of the regulation that muzzles business and industry would again make the USA the destination for commerce. Putting people back to work in "the marketplace" is essential to salvaging this mess.

I have ZERO faith that any of the thugs in power will do anything that will make much impact in turning things around. I don't think there are even a handful in Washington that have a clue as to what to do and or have the WILL to do it. I am preparing for the worst. It is inevitable.

In 25th HOUR Ed Norton gives a great speech Ed Norton - 25th Hour monologue and the bottom line is if you want to know who is at fault.... LOOK IN THE MIRROR....there is no one else to blame for our problems. Instead of picking this group or that group or that bad idea..... LOOK IN THE MIRROR.

Now do you think we have 300million people that can look in that mirror? 30million? 10million? Now you know the answer.

Fellas we are in an economic $h** storm and it will not get better soon. If our leaders man up now things will get real tough the next 2-5 years , but in -10- years we would have a fighters chance of coming out better and stronger. If we do not man up NOW....well the party is over.... You will see the third world in YOUR neighborhood.

Republicans are poised to do well in November 2010 and, quite possibly, beyond.

But fair doubt persist about the party's fitness to become relevant to the governance of this country again.

Hence, Tea Party.

(02-23-2010 03:34 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(02-23-2010 07:33 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I thought maybe it was one of those questions like, "How many animals did Moses put in the ark?" 

I think the difference for many is that it was kind of the first nail in the coffin, and now there are a whole lot more. I have a little different perspective. I'm still waiting on someone to address the problems Ross Perot was talking about back in 1992. I thought the republicans would after they took over congress in 1994. Then I thought Shrub would, but he turned out to be anything but. I don't think Obama has any inclination to do the things that need to be done, but I don't see anyone on the republican side who has a clue either.

I really don't see how the US is going to survive as a livable country. I really don't. And I'm incredibly frustrated because I don't know what I can do about it. Worse, I don't think the vast majority of people are going to realize how bad things are until it's too late. The warning signs will be the collapse.

I have read enough of Obama's writings and heard enough of his speeches to feel that I have a pretty good idea of where he wants to take the country, and his vision of America is a place that I want nothing to do with.

And I see nothing from the republican leadership to suggest that they have a better idea.

This. We have crossed the Rubicon and both gangs are equally at fault.

I only see RADICAL change as a possibility of salvaging this mess. I'd start with ending corporate taxes and almost total deregulation to again make America the destination of worldwide business instead of the place business runs away from...then...cut government spending to bare bones...across the board..including military,social and entitlements.

Only individuals pay taxes since corporate taxes are simply overhead...ending corporate taxation would lead to lowering of prices and put money back into the pockets of those that spend it. Consumer spending is the REAL fuel for an economy...NOT government spending. Ending much of the regulation that muzzles business and industry would again make the USA the destination for commerce. Putting people back to work in "the marketplace" is essential to salvaging this mess.

I have ZERO faith that any of the thugs in power will do anything that will make much impact in turning things around. I don't think there are even a handful in Washington that have a clue as to what to do and or have the WILL to do it. I am preparing for the worst. It is inevitable.

Although regulation is probably excessive, there are a lot of regulations that keep businesses, especially big businesses, from screwing everybody - shareholders, their employees, and taxpayers. As time goes by, businesses come up with new, inventive ways of getting around regulations and screwing more people. And cutting back that much on government all at once would throw a huge number of people out of work at a time when unemployment is already high. Unfortunately, businesses can't be trusted any more than government can.

Although it is counterintuitive and probably will never happen, cuts in government probably make more sense (at least the damage is mitigated) when the economy is booming.